Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use : = Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use
Various process-based models are extensively being used to analyze and forecast catchment hydrology and water quality. However, it is always important to select the appropriate hydrological and water quality modeling tools to predict and analyze the watershed and also consider their strengths and weaknesses. Different factors such as data availability, hydrological, hydraulic, and water quality processes and their desired level of complexity are crucial for selecting a plausible modeling tool. This review is focused on suitable model selection with a focus on desired hydrological, hydraulic and water quality processes(nitrogen fate and transport in surface, subsurface and groundwater bodies) by keeping in view the typical lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use,higher groundwater tables, and decreased retention times due to the provision of artificial drainage. In this study, four different physically based, partially and fully distributed integrated water modeling tools, SWAT(soil and water assessment tool), SWIM(soil and water integrated model),HSPF(hydrological simulation program– FORTRAN) and a combination of tools from DHI(MIKE SHE coupled with MIKE 11 and ECO Lab), have been reviewed particularly for the Tollense River catchment located in North-eastern Germany. DHI combined tools and SWAT were more suitable for simulating the desired hydrological processes, but in the case of river hydraulics and water quality, the DHI family of tools has an edge due to their integrated coupling between MIKE SHE, MIKE 11 and ECO Lab. In case of SWAT, it needs to be coupled with another tool to model the hydraulics in the Tollense River as SWAT does not include backwater effects and provision of control structures. However, both SWAT and DHI tools are more data demanding in comparison to SWIM and HSPF. For studying nitrogen fate and transport in unsaturated, saturated, and river zone, HSPF was a better model to simulate the desired nitrogen transformation and transport processes. However, for nitrogen dynamics and transformations in shallow streams, ECO Lab had an edge due its flexibility for inclusion of user-desired water quality parameters and processes. In the case of SWIM, most of the input data and governing equations are similar to SWAT but it does not include water bodies(ponds and lakes), wetlands and drainage systems. In this review, only the processes that were needed to simulate the Tollense River catchment were considered, however the resulted model selection criteria can be generalized to other lowland catchments in Australia, North-western Europe and North America with similar complexity..
Various process-based models are extensively being used to analyze and forecast catchment hydrology and water quality. However, it is always important to select the appropriate hydrological and water quality modeling tools to predict and analyze the watershed and also consider their strengths and weaknesses. Different factors such as data availability, hydrological, hydraulic, and water quality processes and their desired level of complexity are crucial for selecting a plausible modeling tool. This review is focused on suitable model selection with a focus on desired hydrological, hydraulic and water quality processes(nitrogen fate and transport in surface, subsurface and groundwater bodies) by keeping in view the typical lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use,higher groundwater tables, and decreased retention times due to the provision of artificial drainage. In this study, four different physically based, partially and fully distributed integrated water modeling tools, SWAT(soil and water assessment tool), SWIM(soil and water integrated model),HSPF(hydrological simulation program–FORTRAN) and a combination of tools from DHI(MIKE SHE coupled with MIKE 11 and ECO Lab), have been reviewed particularly for the Tollense River catchment located in North-eastern Germany. DHI combined tools and SWAT were more suitable for simulating the desired hydrological processes, but in the case of river hydraulics and water quality, the DHI family of tools has an edge due to their integrated coupling between MIKE SHE, MIKE 11 and ECO Lab. In case of SWAT, it needs to be coupled with another tool to model the hydraulics in the Tollense River as SWAT does not include backwater effects and provision of control structures. However, both SWAT and DHI tools are more data demanding in comparison to SWIM and HSPF. For studying nitrogen fate and transport in unsaturated, saturated, and river zone, HSPF was a better model to simulate the desired nitrogen transformation and transport processes. However, for nitrogen dynamics and transformations in shallow streams, ECO Lab had an edge due its flexibility for inclusion of user-desired water quality parameters and processes. In the case of SWIM, most of the input data and governing equations are similar to SWAT but it does not include water bodies(ponds and lakes), wetlands and drainage systems. In this review, only the processes that were needed to simulate the Tollense River catchment were considered, however the resulted model selection criteria can be generalized to other lowland catchments in Australia, North-western Europe and North America with similar complexity..
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2018-12-15 2018 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2018-12-15 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2018 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering - (2018), 04 vom: 15. Dez., Seite 420-431 Original Letters: Enthalten in (DE-600)2997563-3 (DE-600)2997563-3 |
| Reihe: |
|---|
| Sprache: |
Chinesisch |
|---|
| Weiterer Titel: |
Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Muhammad WASEEM [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
oversea.cnki.net [lizenzpflichtig] |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Author info:Muhammad WASEEM;Frauke KACHHOLZ;Jens TR?NCKNER;Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences,University of Rostock |
|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
|---|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
CAJ612021378 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | CAJ612021378 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230119142256.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 221231s2018 cc |||||o 00| ||chi c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)CAJ612021378 | ||
| 035 | |a (SBB-XA)CAJ_FASE201804004 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a chi | ||
| 044 | |c XB-CN | ||
| 084 | |a ASIEN |q DE-1a |2 fid | ||
| 084 | |a X52 |2 clc | ||
| 100 | 0 | |a Muhammad WASEEM |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use |b = Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use |
| 246 | 3 | 1 | |a Suitability of common models to estimate hydrology and diffuse water pollution in North-eastern German lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2018-12-15 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 0 | |a China Academic Journals (CAJ) |a D |a 农业科技 = Agriculture | |
| 490 | 0 | |a China Academic Journals (CAJ) |a B |a 理工B(化学化工冶金环境矿业) = Chemistry/ Metallurgy/ Environment/ Mine Industry | |
| 500 | |a Author info:Muhammad WASEEM;Frauke KACHHOLZ;Jens TR?NCKNER;Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences,University of Rostock | ||
| 520 | |a Various process-based models are extensively being used to analyze and forecast catchment hydrology and water quality. However, it is always important to select the appropriate hydrological and water quality modeling tools to predict and analyze the watershed and also consider their strengths and weaknesses. Different factors such as data availability, hydrological, hydraulic, and water quality processes and their desired level of complexity are crucial for selecting a plausible modeling tool. This review is focused on suitable model selection with a focus on desired hydrological, hydraulic and water quality processes(nitrogen fate and transport in surface, subsurface and groundwater bodies) by keeping in view the typical lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use,higher groundwater tables, and decreased retention times due to the provision of artificial drainage. In this study, four different physically based, partially and fully distributed integrated water modeling tools, SWAT(soil and water assessment tool), SWIM(soil and water integrated model),HSPF(hydrological simulation program– FORTRAN) and a combination of tools from DHI(MIKE SHE coupled with MIKE 11 and ECO Lab), have been reviewed particularly for the Tollense River catchment located in North-eastern Germany. DHI combined tools and SWAT were more suitable for simulating the desired hydrological processes, but in the case of river hydraulics and water quality, the DHI family of tools has an edge due to their integrated coupling between MIKE SHE, MIKE 11 and ECO Lab. In case of SWAT, it needs to be coupled with another tool to model the hydraulics in the Tollense River as SWAT does not include backwater effects and provision of control structures. However, both SWAT and DHI tools are more data demanding in comparison to SWIM and HSPF. For studying nitrogen fate and transport in unsaturated, saturated, and river zone, HSPF was a better model to simulate the desired nitrogen transformation and transport processes. However, for nitrogen dynamics and transformations in shallow streams, ECO Lab had an edge due its flexibility for inclusion of user-desired water quality parameters and processes. In the case of SWIM, most of the input data and governing equations are similar to SWAT but it does not include water bodies(ponds and lakes), wetlands and drainage systems. In this review, only the processes that were needed to simulate the Tollense River catchment were considered, however the resulted model selection criteria can be generalized to other lowland catchments in Australia, North-western Europe and North America with similar complexity. | ||
| 520 | |a Various process-based models are extensively being used to analyze and forecast catchment hydrology and water quality. However, it is always important to select the appropriate hydrological and water quality modeling tools to predict and analyze the watershed and also consider their strengths and weaknesses. Different factors such as data availability, hydrological, hydraulic, and water quality processes and their desired level of complexity are crucial for selecting a plausible modeling tool. This review is focused on suitable model selection with a focus on desired hydrological, hydraulic and water quality processes(nitrogen fate and transport in surface, subsurface and groundwater bodies) by keeping in view the typical lowland catchments with intensive agricultural land use,higher groundwater tables, and decreased retention times due to the provision of artificial drainage. In this study, four different physically based, partially and fully distributed integrated water modeling tools, SWAT(soil and water assessment tool), SWIM(soil and water integrated model),HSPF(hydrological simulation program–FORTRAN) and a combination of tools from DHI(MIKE SHE coupled with MIKE 11 and ECO Lab), have been reviewed particularly for the Tollense River catchment located in North-eastern Germany. DHI combined tools and SWAT were more suitable for simulating the desired hydrological processes, but in the case of river hydraulics and water quality, the DHI family of tools has an edge due to their integrated coupling between MIKE SHE, MIKE 11 and ECO Lab. In case of SWAT, it needs to be coupled with another tool to model the hydraulics in the Tollense River as SWAT does not include backwater effects and provision of control structures. However, both SWAT and DHI tools are more data demanding in comparison to SWIM and HSPF. For studying nitrogen fate and transport in unsaturated, saturated, and river zone, HSPF was a better model to simulate the desired nitrogen transformation and transport processes. However, for nitrogen dynamics and transformations in shallow streams, ECO Lab had an edge due its flexibility for inclusion of user-desired water quality parameters and processes. In the case of SWIM, most of the input data and governing equations are similar to SWAT but it does not include water bodies(ponds and lakes), wetlands and drainage systems. In this review, only the processes that were needed to simulate the Tollense River catchment were considered, however the resulted model selection criteria can be generalized to other lowland catchments in Australia, North-western Europe and North America with similar complexity. | ||
| 610 | 2 | 4 | |a Faculty of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences,University of Rostock |
| 650 | 4 | |a 水体污染及其防治 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 环境污染及其防治 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 环境科学、安全科学 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Environment Science and Resources Utilization | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 农业科技 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Agriculture | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 理工B(化学化工冶金环境矿业) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Chemistry/ Metallurgy/ Environment/ Mine Industry | |
| 650 | 4 | |a diffuse pollution | |
| 650 | 4 | |a ECO Lab | |
| 650 | 4 | |a HSPF | |
| 650 | 4 | |a lowland catchment | |
| 650 | 4 | |a MIKE 11 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a MIKE SHE | |
| 650 | 4 | |a modeling tools | |
| 650 | 4 | |a SWAT | |
| 650 | 4 | |a SWIM | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Tollense River | |
| 650 | 4 | |a water quality | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Frauke KACHHOLZ |4 oth | |
| 700 | 0 | |a Jens TR?NCKNER |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |6 880-01 |i Enthalten in |t Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering |d Bei jing shi : [Verlag nicht ermittelbar], 2015 |g (2018), 04 vom: 15. Dez., Seite 420-431 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)CAJ517857669 |w (DE-600)2997563-3 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2018 |g number:04 |g day:15 |g month:12 |g pages:420-431 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://erf.sbb.spk-berlin.de/han/caj/oversea.cnki.net/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?dbcode=CJFD&filename=FASE201804004 |x Verlag |y CrossAsia Link |z Deutschlandweit zugänglich |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://oversea.cnki.net/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?dbcode=CJFD&filename=FASE201804004 |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |
| 880 | 0 | 8 | |6 773-01/Hans |i Enthalten in |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)CAJ517857669 |w (DE-600)2997563-3 |7 nnns |
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-CAJ | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_CAJ | ||
| 912 | |a FID-ASIEN | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-OA3.1 | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-CAJ | ||
| 936 | u | w | |j 2018 |e 04 |b 15 |c 12 |h 420-431 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2018 |e 04 |b 15 |c 12 |h 420-431 | ||
| 980 | |2 11 |1 01 |x 0001 |b 631522727 |c 00 |f 5:FIDXASIA |d --%%-- |e --%%-- |j --%%-- |y k |z 31-12-22 | ||
| 981 | |2 11 |1 01 |x 0001 |r http://erf.sbb.spk-berlin.de/han/caj/oversea.cnki.net/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?dbcode=CJFD&filename=FASE201804004 | ||